The next thing is to show that in India there is a partition of the powers of the government, which proves that there is no absolute power delegated.
In every province the first person is the Subahdar or Nazim, or Viceroy: he has the power of the sword, and the administration of criminal justice only. Then there is the Dewan, or High Steward: he has the revenue and all exchequer causes under him, to be governed according to the law and custom and institutions of the kingdom. The law of inheritances, successions, and everything that relates to them, is under the Cadi, in whose court these matters are tried. But this, too, was subdivided. The Cadi could not judge, but by the advice of his assessors. Properly
in the Mahomedan law there is no appeal, only a removal of the cause; but when there is no judgment, as none can be when the court is not unanimous, it goes to the general assembly of all the men of the law. There are, I will venture to say, other divisions and subdivisions; for there are the Kanongoes, who hold their places for life, to be the conservators of the canons, customs, and good usages of the country: all these, as well as the Cadi and the Mufti, hold their places and situations, not during the wanton pleasure of the prince, but on permanent and fixed terms for life. All these powers of magistracy, revenue, and law are all different, consequently not delegated in the whole to any one person.
This is the provincial constitution, and these the laws of Bengal; which proves, if there were no other proof, by the division of the functions and authorities, that the supreme power of the state in the Mogul empire did by no means delegate to any of its officers the supreme power in its fulness. Whether or no we have delegated to Mr. Hastings the supreme power of King and Parliament, that he should act with the plenitude of authority of the British legislature, you are to judge.
Mr. Hastings has no refuge here. Let him run from law to law; let him fly from the common law and the sacred institutions of the country in which he was born; let him fly from acts of Parliament, from which his power originated; let him plead his ignorance of them, or fly in the face of them. Will he fly to the Mahomedan law? That condemns him. Will he fly to the high magistracy of Asia to defend taking of presents? Padishah and the Sultan would condemn him to a cruel death. Will he fly to the
Sophis, to the laws of Persia, or to the practice of those monarchs? I cannot utter the pains, the tortures, that would be inflicted on him, if he were to govern there as he has done in a British province. Let him fly where he will, from law to law; law, I thank God, meets him everywhere, and enforced, too, by the practice of the most impious tyrants, which he quotes as if it would justify his conduct. I would as willingly have him tried by the law of the Koran, or the Institutes of Tamerlane, as on the common law or statute law of this kingdom.
The next question is, whether the Gentoo laws justify arbitrary power: and if he finds any sanctuary there, let him take it, with the cow in the pagoda. The Gentoos have a law which positively proscribes in magistrates any idea of will,—a law with which, or rather with extracts of it, that gentleman himself has furnished us. These people in many points are governed by their own ancient written law, called the Shaster. Its interpreters and judges are the Pundits. This law is comprehensive, extending to all the concerns of life, affording principles and maxims and legal theories applicable to all cases, drawn from the sources of natural equity, modified by their institutions, full of refinement and subtilty of distinction equal to that of any other law, and has the grand test of all law, that, wherever it has prevailed, the country has been populous, flourishing, and happy.
Upon the whole, then, follow him where you will, let him have Eastern or Western law, you find everywhere arbitrary power and peculation of governors proscribed and horribly punished,—more so than I should ever wish to punish any, the most guilty, human creature. And if this be the case, as I hope
and trust it has been proved to your Lordships, that there is law in these countries, that there is no delegation of power which exempts a governor from the law, then I say at any rate a British governor is to answer for his conduct, and cannot be justified by wicked examples and profligate practices.
But another thing which he says is, that he was left to himself, to govern himself by his own practice: that is to say, when he had taken one bribe, he might take another; when he had robbed one man of his property, he might rob another; when he had imprisoned one man arbitrarily, and extorted money from him, he might do so by another. He resorts at first to the practice of barbarians and usurpers; at last he comes to his own. Now, if your Lordships will try him by such maxims and principles, he is certainly clear: for there is no manner of doubt that there is nothing he has practised once which he has not practised again; and then the repetition of crimes becomes the means of his indemnity.